civil war with marjorie three names of georgia polling her supporters as to whether they would support a national divorce. spoiler alert. they do. the republicans hope to turn this country into is so unthinkable. think texas except everywhere. with the despicable donald trump as maybe the permanent president completely unleashed with full control of the justice department, the military, the cia, the fbi, et cetera, et cetera, plus the nuclear codes. even as we speak, republicans when not banning books about race or putting abortion bounties on women or nuking the right to vote for anyone who isn t on their team are hurriedly installing hand picked trump loyalists into every realm of government packing local election with foot soldiers and purging opposition forces. when fascism arrives in america, as congressman adam schiff warned this morning, the fix is in. the greater danger to the country is what is going on around the nation. people pushing the former president s big l
results of the presidential election. coming up, we ll dig deeper into the indictment and the former president s defense. can trump be charged with lying if he believes what he said was true? the answer may hinge, at least in part, at least on district judge tanya chutkan, a vet ran on cases involving january 6th defendants. what members of congress are claiming and will it be a jury of his peers or the electorate who render the final verdict? we begin with tomorrow s arraignment in a d.c. federal court where donald trump will be formally charged for repeatedly spreading lies as part of an elaborate criminal scheme with the ultimate goal to hang on to power by any means necessary. in fact, trump is raising four federal counts including three conspiracy, to defraud the united states, to obstruct an official proceeding and to impede the people s right to vote. ever since the news broke, the former president, his allies and attorneys have been working furiously to smear jack
because the court of appeals heard a major concession, see what i did there, from the lawyer from a former president who has refused to concede that he lost the election, and he did lose that election. before today trump s lawyers were absolutely, what s the word, adamant, totally convinced that the president has absolute immunity from trump s conduct while of course he was in office. they wouldn t even budge on this point. well, first they wouldn t budge. right out of the gate with question from one of the judges in the federal court, they were forced to make a powerful concession, that of course there is not absolute immunity meaning, you can never charge a former president for action taken while in office, if it was criminal or otherwise? they could see that you can prosecute under certain circumstances. and they only admitted that after the judge gave them a whole string of hypotheticals, there s only one legitimate truthful answer could a president who ordered sealed